Celecoxib Combined with Thalidomide in the Treatment of Refractory Neoplastic Fever in Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma: A Case Report

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Excellent

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Very good

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Very good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Very good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Very good

Comments:

The case is described in adequate detail. The Discussion section thoroughly explores and arrives at the most likely mechanism behind the efficacy of celecoxib + thalidomide in the present case. It aptly suggests that celecoxib + thalidomide can be used to improve the low KPS score of cancer patients with severe fatigue and make way for the opportunity for chemotherapy.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Very good; The Figures 2 and 3 must be mentioned in the text.

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

Comments: Some minor issues were noted –

·       It seems that some incorrect units were used, i.e., “μ/mL” for CA125 and CA153 in Case report must be replaced with “U/mL” (must be verified by author).

·       In the 4^th sentence of the Abstract, “shows” must be replaced with “presents”.

·       In the last sentence of the Background, “lives” must be replaced with “life”.

·       In the 14^th sentence of Case report, “has” must be replaced with “had”.

·       In the 20^th sentence of Case report, “immunoglobulin” was misspelled, and “Plasmodium” must begin with a capital letter and italicized as it is a genus name.

·       Some punctuations were incorrectly used, e.g., “.” after “tumors” in the 1^st sentence of the Abstract must be removed, “,” before “therefore” in the 14^th sentence of Case report must be replaced with “;”, and so on.

·       Some first letters of words were unnecessarily capitalized in the middle of sentences.

·       Articles, i.e., a, an, or the were missing in some places.

Further comments on the paper

Comments: The significance of the manuscript lies in that in the absence of any standard treatment guideline for refractory neoplastic fever, it presents a case in which after ineffective treatment with various antibiotics, ibuprofen, and corticosteroids, the patient’s body temperature returned to normal (with significant reduction in fatigue and improvement in quality of life) after a 48-hour treatment with celecoxib + thalidomide in advanced cholangiocarcinoma, and he achieved an overall survival of 8 months with radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team